Rules:1. Respect the other posters2. Don't post personal information about other posters without their permission3. Don't post porn/gore/illegal stuff4. English is the official and only language allowed on the forum 5. Don't make public calls for moderators' action. Use the report button sitting on each post's right side:6. Don't call other posters' arguments/opinions/points of view stupid/dumb/idiotic or any other similar adjective. Doing that just lowers the quality of debate, turning it into "your argument is dumb... no your argument is dumb" kids' playground style of debating. If you disagree with a point of view present the facts supporting your point of view and the readers will make their own mind whether an argument is stupid/dumb/idiotic or not.7. Topic hijacking is not allowed. If you want to discuss something else than the subject a certain topic is about start your own topic.

Other information:Although this forum is dedicated to Tier 2&3 rugby fans, discussions about all rugby related subjects are welcome here, including the RWC, Six Nations, T14, AP, Super Rugby, etc...

Registering and activating a new account should take you about 2 minutes, but if you have any issues send an e-mail at "forum at T2Rugby dot com" (you can figure the address out )

When you have some big news to share with the board please open a new topic and post them that way rather than sticking the important news on the 53rd page of a mega-topic.

AdminT2R wrote:6. Don't call other posters' arguments/opinions/points of view stupid/dumb/idiotic or any other similar adjective. Doing that just lowers the quality of debate, turning it into "your argument is dumb... no your argument is dump" kids' playground style of debating. If you disagree with a point of view present the facts supporting your point of view and the readers will make their own mind whether an argument is stupid/dumb/idiotic.=

This point simply doesn't add up. What lowers quality of debate is extraordinarily <insert adjective from OP> posters, most often leading to debates that then revolve around silly, obvious points.

Good example is the "Union led poaching" thread, where the main discussion and point of the OP was hijacked into revolving a couple of posters repetitively posting <insert adjective from OP> views. That was about the stupidest thread this forum has seen.

There's no point pretending stupidity doesn't exist and welcoming it onto the forum. Luckily, in a very niche forum very few people with a complete lack of knowledge or interest are likely to sign up and post ignorantly, there's only really a couple that have done that. But I would suggest the above is out of line with standard norms, and counter productive to what it aims to achieve.

Beeman wrote:This point simply doesn't add up. What lowers quality of debate is extraordinarily <insert adjective from OP> posters, most often leading to debates that then revolve around silly, obvious points.

"Your post is stupid...no, your post is stupid" certainly does lower the quality of debate. In fact that's not even a debate and it doesn't produce anything of interest for any readers.

Beeman wrote:Good example is the "Union led poaching" thread, where the main discussion and point of the OP was hijacked into revolving a couple of posters repetitively posting <insert adjective from OP> views. That was about the stupidest thread this forum has seen.

Not everyone shares an opinion, and not every debate has to end with someone winning and convincing everyone else. Posters should make their opinions heard, and if they can't convince the people they're debating with, agree to disagree.

Beeman wrote:There's no point pretending stupidity doesn't exist and welcoming it onto the forum. Luckily, in a very niche forum very few people with a complete lack of knowledge or interest are likely to sign up and post ignorantly, there's only really a couple that have done that. But I would suggest the above is out of line with standard norms, and counter productive to what it aims to achieve.

Stupidity certainly does exist, and it can be easily be exposed by presenting facts countering the stupid claims. The readers can make up their own minds whether something is stupid or not, they don't need other posters to tell that it is.

Beeman wrote:This point simply doesn't add up. What lowers quality of debate is extraordinarily <insert adjective from OP> posters, most often leading to debates that then revolve around silly, obvious points.

"Your post is stupid...no, your post is stupid" certainly does lower the quality of debate. In fact that's not even a debate and it doesn't produce anything of interest for any readers.

No doubt, but welcoming stupidity with open arms doesn't produce anything of interest either. Threads with people arguing whether poaching exists or not does not reflect well on the forum. It's the equivalent of arguing whether how much 2+2 equals. From my experience, arguing with morons is like banging your head on the wall.

A poster here claimed me saying that giving the IRFU's policies the boot, was racist. Another poster claimed the IRFU don't poach, previously I have been involved with debates that have included comments such as "Man Utd don't care about winning", these are not viewpoints that are worthy of a detailed reply as to why they are bullshit. Indulging in that a debate about that bullshit hurts the standards of the forum, and I myself will admit to being guilty of not ignoring it and then idiots then bringing more bullshit and getting really annoying. But even if I ignore it, threads are still at risk of getting crapped on with silly debates, and it's sometimes too tempting when there is someone criticising your post not to respond.

I'm not referencing you at all in any of this just to be clear. But there are a couple of posters here with little interest or knowledge in Tier 2 rugby who have just signed up to leave excrements on threads. It's the equivalent of me signing up to post on MunsterFans.

Fortunately there are only 2 of these posters here as it is a niche forum. But I would highly recommend that mods keep up standards by removing these extreme cases of ignorance, especially repeat cases from those who get their arguments destroyed and then keep bringing them up.

As an aside, on one of the best forums around, they have a subforum where mods move long winded circular or off topic debates to be continued elsewhere once they just get tiresome. Might be an idea to add something like that here to move thread hijacking shit like what happened on the "Union Led Poaching" thread, which was designed to be a discussion about what the eligibility should be not whether the IRFU poach or not, which is frankly bloody obvious.

Are other members aware of when you have them on 'foe' mode - ie ignore? I have been forced to put a couple of posters on that mode and if they are unaware of this that may create confusion and leven lead to misunderstandings with others contributing to the same thread.

The reasons I put these members on ignore were for insulting language. This was reported but the comments in some instances were not removed, and in no instance did the offender receive a ban.

Meanwhile, I myself received a warning for 'not admitting that I was wrong' though at no time did I insult anyone or make any other kind of offensive comment.

Could we have a little more insight on what is considered unacceptable behaviour on the forum, because this seems a little strange to me.

If they're good enough to play at World Cups, then why not in between?